SaaS pricing model simulator
Model flat-rate, seat-based, and usage-based pricing against your real customer mix to see which generates more revenue — before you commit to a pricing change.
Set a price for each model, define your customer segments by seat count and monthly usage, and see total MRR and per-segment revenue across all three models side by side.
Pricing model inputs
Model pricing
Same price for every customer.
Per user per month.
Per API call, row, action, etc.
Customer segments
| Segment | Customers | Avg seats | Avg units/mo |
|---|
Revenue comparison
Flat-rate MRR
—
Seat-based MRR
—
Usage-based MRR
—
| Segment | Flat | Seat | Usage |
|---|
How the simulator works
Flat-rate MRR = total customers × flat price. Seat-based MRR = sum across segments of (customers × avg seats × seat price). Usage-based MRR = sum across segments of (customers × avg units × unit price). All three are pure models with no minimum commitments or volume discounts — add those to the unit prices if you want to model a more realistic hybrid.
The most common finding when running this simulation is that large customer segments pay far less under flat-rate pricing than they would under seat- or usage-based pricing, while small customers pay more. If your top 20% of customers by usage account for 60%+ of your costs, that's a strong signal that flat-rate pricing is leaving significant revenue on the table.
About this tool
This tool compares three SaaS pricing models — flat-rate, per-seat, and usage-based — across up to four configurable customer segments. Inputs: flat-rate price, per-seat price, per-unit price, and for each segment: customer count, average seats, and average monthly units. Outputs: total MRR under each model, per-segment revenue breakdown, a ranked comparison, and notes on which model suits different customer distributions.
Frequently asked questions
What are the three main SaaS pricing models?
Flat-rate pricing charges every customer the same amount regardless of usage or team size — simple to communicate and predict, but doesn't capture value from heavy users. Seat-based pricing scales with team size and is intuitive for collaboration tools, but can be gamed by customers who share accounts. Usage-based pricing aligns revenue with value delivered and scales naturally with customer growth, but makes revenue harder to forecast and can cause customers to under-use to control costs.
Which pricing model is best for SaaS?
It depends on how value is distributed across your customers. If all customers get roughly the same value regardless of team size or usage, flat-rate is simplest. If value scales with team size (e.g., a project management tool), seat-based pricing naturally captures that. If value scales with consumption (e.g., an API or data pipeline), usage-based pricing is the better fit. Many modern SaaS companies use hybrid models: a per-seat base with usage overage charges, or a usage-based model with a minimum commitment.
How do I know which model generates more revenue from my customer base?
Model it against your actual customer distribution. This simulator lets you define segments by seats and usage volume to see the revenue difference across models. The key insight is usually which customers are over- or under-paying under the current model — large customers often subsidise small ones under flat-rate pricing, while usage-based pricing can expose revenue you're leaving on the table from heavy users.
What is a hybrid pricing model?
Hybrid pricing combines elements of two or more models. Common examples: a per-seat base with a usage overage beyond an included allowance; a flat platform fee plus per-seat licensing; or a usage-based model with a minimum monthly spend. Hybrid models capture more of the value curve but add billing complexity and can be harder for customers to predict. They tend to work best when there are clearly distinct cost drivers — access (seats) and consumption (usage) — that both scale independently with customer size.